Faith Freedom International :: View topic - Moderanization: A western Dream and Ummah's Nightmare

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Attention: Year 2009 is here Wishing a very Happy New Year to all members of FFI. Our new and improved site is ready. To visit main site, click at faithfreedom.org and to visit our new forum, click at forum09.faithfreedom.org and register again. Do not worry about your old forum posts and PM, everything is saved here till 31st December, 2008 for future references.

Moderanization: A western Dream and Ummah's Nightmare
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.

This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.

Faith Freedom International Forum Index -> [Archived] Comments on the Articles Posted in the Main Site

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

lilith

Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 821

Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 3:26 pm Post subject:

Make your own radical flag, lke help?
Grey wolfs, Bozkurt or what?
Those three moons stand symbolic for the manes that are erected in agression. Turk-cypriot? Not recognised flag.

Quote:

Wolves are equally at home on prairies, in forestlands, and on all but the highest mountains. In the winter they travel in packs in search of food. Small animals and birds are the common prey of wolves, but a pack may sometimes attack reindeer, sheep, and other large mammals, usually selecting weak, old, or very young animals for easier capture.
When no live prey can be found, wolves feed on carrion. They also eat berries.

Quote:

As social animals, wolves exhibit behavioural patterns that clearly communicate dominance over or submission to one another. The communal howling of a pack may serve to assemble its members, communicate with other packs, or advertise its territorial claims, or it may be simply a source of pleasure

Quote:

An attempt to reintroduce red wolves to parts of North Carolina has involved identifying red wolves that were not part coyote; the success of this project is not yet clear. In 1995 and 1996, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service reintroduced Canadian gray wolves into Yellowstone National Park despite protest from ranchers and some biologists.
The reintroduced wolves are producing more offspring than expected.

Usually connected with the extreme right. Integration not yet clear, and prolific offspring.
Milliyetci Hareket Partisi
Racist, reactionaire extreme right. Threatening letters to more moderate muslims like Alevites and kurds(!)=PKK according to them.
Friendships oraganisation Holland-Turkey. No longer subsidised, unclear bookkeeping.>Turan

Okay we're up to date.
_________________
"You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean;
if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty.
Where there is love there is life."
Mahatma Gandhi

lilith

Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 821

Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 4:24 pm Post subject:

Quote:

A few days ago I met an Iraqi Kurd who in the course of our discussion (which wasn't about religion), complained that activities of many of his fellow Muslims embarrasses him and sometimes makes him ashamed to be identified as a Muslim

that brought the wolf out.

medhi, c'est pas chic.

"terror chic"
Nucleair energy yes, bombs No.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/sfeature/blastmap.html
nothing top-secret about it by the way. just that the rest of the world lacks information.
What on earth does a regular muslim think a nuclear bomb is?
_________________
"You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean;
if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty.
Where there is love there is life."
Mahatma Gandhi

scaredguy

Joined: 08 Jun 2004
Posts: 1239

Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 4:48 pm Post subject:

Jesus said "let the dead bury the dead". So don't waste too much time on Jesus - christians believe he is alive but he is de facto dead. Jesus, Mohammad ... they all left behind many confusions. None of them had an idea of what problems mankind of the 21st century will face. Those who look to them and to kuran or some other so-called holy book are only perpetuating the confusions and adding new ones to them. Moderate muslims are the protective shield for muslim fanatics. Muslims fascists are among muslim liberals and muslim moderates like deadly-poisonous fish in oxygen-rich nutrition-rich waters - swimming, diving, hiding, breeding, "educating" etc. merrily. You can't catch this tricky fish unless the pond is laid dry or almost dry. But "our" non-muslim leaders are busy enjoying lives in and around these ponds, wallowing on their banks (yes money-banks too).

Barbaros

Joined: 29 Sep 2004
Posts: 279
Location: Ergenekon

Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 6:11 pm Post subject:

Kurds are more moderate muslims???? :-D All of honour killings in Turkey is made by KURDS themselves X

Bam

Joined: 28 Apr 2004
Posts: 137

Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 7:35 pm Post subject:

scaredguy wrote:

Jesus, Mohammad ... they all left behind many confusions.

Very true!! Historically and scripturally, both were/are violently intolerant.
While Christians and Jews have evolved beyond that barbaric past, Muslims clearly have not.

piggy wrote:

You still haven't provided any valid evidence that supports your claim that the "sword" as mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 10:34 meant a weapon

Jesus wasn't narrating a parable when he said - I have not come for peace but with sword (Mathew 10:34). The onus is on you (piggy the mind reader) to prove that Jesus didn't mean what he said - sword.
From the context - I have not come to bring peace - it is quite clear he actually meant sword as weapon.

piggy wrote:

You still have not provided any valid evidence that Jesus sought to overthrow the Romans

Historically crucifixtion was the punishment for those who rebelled against Roman rule. And as you rightly quoted Jesus aspired to be king:

piggy wrote:

Are you the king of the Jews?" "Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied.

Obviously as a "king", he wouldn't want to share power with the Romans.

piggy wrote:

Would you cite the evidence that leads you to assert that Jesus "claimed to be king of the Jews"?

Please refer to your own aforementioned quote: Are you the king of the Jews?" "Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied.

piggy wrote:

Can you get your head around the fact that Jesus agreed with the ten commandments, but did not agree with the ruling law-makers and penal-system of the day?

.
Where in the bible did Jesus make such a distinction between ten commandments and the penalties? Please read the verse again:
I have come not to abolish the law of the prophets...For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven (Mathew 5:17-19).
From this verse, it is obvious that Jesus fully endorsed the Mosaic laws, not just the ten commandments. He reiterated that the law should neither be changed nor relaxed - not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments...shall be the least in the kingdom of heaven

piggy wrote:

You have not provided any valid evidence that Jesus was talking about the penal-system of Moses or variations thereof, when he spoke of the "law".

You are making an absurd meaningless distinction. It appears you do not understand what law means. All over the world and throughout history, laws are enforced by penalties, otherwise the law would be pointless. If there are no penalties for infringement, then it isn't a law - it is an agreement.

piggy wrote:

even tho' it's not fruiting-season, there might be some fruit still on the tree

No insult intended, but you appear to be as dimwitted as Jesus. Why would a tree - against its nature - bear fruit outside its season, when Jesus did not perform any such "miracle"?

piggy wrote:

Where did Jesus claim to be of "noble birth"?...........your invention again?

The Bible (Mathew 1:1-17, Luke 3:23-3

traces his ancestry to king David. He is also said to be the son of God, conceived by the holy spirit (Luke 1:35). Or isn't being conceived by Yahweh/Elohim noble enough for you?

piggy wrote:

Bam wrote:

Then what was the whip for?

To crack and make a noise, to get attention, to drive the animals out, to express anger.
YOU said he flogged people.....you made this up.

Whips are primarily for flogging unless otherwise stated, and the bible did not state otherwise. You are the ones fabricating this yarn - "To crack and make a noise" - not in the bible.

piggy wrote:

Why did you leave out the following verse John 18:11 Bam?
Jesus commanded Peter, "Put your sword away!

I was simply refuting your false statement that - "Jesus never had a sword nor did he or any of his immediate followers use one".
The issue wasn't what happened thereafter.

piggy wrote:

Bam, I am through with this lengthy exchange.

In other words you acknowledge defeat!!

Spot the difference

Quote:

Jesus said: Those my enemies, who do not want me to rule over them, bring them here and kill them before me (Luke 19:27).

Mohammed said: I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah, 'and whoever said, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', Allah will save his property and his life from me (Sahih Bukhari 9:84:59, Sahih Muslim1:31)

lilith

Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 821

Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:52 pm Post subject:

Quote:

kurds(!)=PKK according to them.

q.e.d.
thank you barbaros

All honour killings?
Didn't they change the law recently? With little effect.
_________________
"You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean;
if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty.
Where there is love there is life."
Mahatma Gandhi

piggy

Joined: 13 Feb 2004
Posts: 6372
Location: Godwana

Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 1:46 am Post subject:

Bam wrote:

In other words you acknowledge defeat!!

Sorry to disappoint your ego Bam.

I am not out to win a competition.

I am debating this issue to address your slanderous accusations and to expose your bias and bigotry, so that the gullible or naive will not accept or believe your false charges at face value.

My mission is accomplished!

You have not proven your charges!

I have said all I need to say to expose your dishonest biased agenda in this matter.

On the issue of any of Jesus' followers using weapons, yes, you are correct, I was wrong, there is one report of Peter cutting-off an ear, when he took it upon himself to defend Jesus.

You are more interested to win this minor point, as your initial accusations were, that Jesus promoted the use of weapons and harm, you have lost focus, and the best you can do is point to Peter, who in fact was ordered by Jesus (your accused) to not use violence.

It is clear in the verse John 18:11 that follows the verses that you relied upon (the verse you conveniently omitted to mention) to win (ego) this minor point to refute my statement, is the very verse that demolishes the structure of your absurd, invented claim that Jesus promoted violence, anarchy and social havoc.

Quote:
'Jesus commanded Peter, "Put your sword away!"'

It is plain to see that Jesus ordered Peter to put down the sword and cease violence surrendered willingly to the authorities, without stirring any violence whatsoever.

The only thing you have proven here is that you have been dishonest Bam.

With this one singular reference to a passage from bible, i.e. John 18 with the deliberate exclusion of John18:11 - you have proven your own invented charges to be false and founded on malicious intent, imagination, reading between the lines non-existent events.

You can announce yourself a winner all you like Bam, my mission in this matter has been accomplished and the readers here at least can see that false, malicious and slanderous accusations should not go unchallenged.

Bottom-line is:

Jesus did not promote or condone violence or killing.

Jesus did not promote or condone the use of weapons.

Jesus did not promote or condone harm to anyone.

Jesus did not promote or condone social havoc.

Jesus did not promote or condone violent revolution to over-throw governments.

pilgrim

Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 2054

Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:21 am Post subject:

Quote:

[quote="Bam"]

piggy wrote:

So if jesus came with a real sword, where are the reports of him and/or his immediate companions carrying swords or using them?

He never had the opportunity as the Romans executed himafter his abortive bid for power. In effect Jesus never went beyond the stage of Mohammed's Meccan (peaceful) Islam.

If you do not die when you die and live a number of years more, there is no guarantee that you would not have become:
a murderer
a pimp
a counterfeiter
a bank robber
a smuggler
a rapist
etc.

You are the most stupid person.
If a person has a history of peacful existence up to his death, why would that person have turned violent had he lived few more years?

Quote:

But it is obvious from his violent utterances (Mathew 10:34, Luke 19:27) that had he achieved his goal of toppling the Romans, he wouldn't have been different from Mohammed or Moses.

Up to his death Jesus was peacful. Period.

Muslims are desparate to asign legitamacy to Muhammad, hence the comparison with Moses. These two men could not have been more different.

As an example, Moses was so decent and good natured, his future father in law screwed him up several times and forced him to marry several of his daughters even though the agreement was that Moses marries a particular daughter after doing indentured labor for several years. Moses wanted only one wife. Moses patiently withstood several decptions.

Muhammad on the other hand lusted and married his adopted son's wife, a 9 year old child, got a declaration from his Allah that he the prophet could marry 5 women and only 4 women for the rest of Muslims. In addition he raped women of prisonerrs of war after killing their husbands.

Muhammad raided, looted and plundered and sent threatening letters to neighboring kings to submit or face war and destruction. Moses did not.

Muhammad with power of the sword established an empire, Moses wandered with his people in the Sinai desert looking for few acres of land to settle after escaping from Egyptian bondage.

Muhammad was enslaver, Moses was a liberator.

In every espect the two men were different as day (Moses) and night (Muhammad).

I challenge you to list 5 to 10 traits or characterstics and explain and provide your evidence to prove that cruel Muhammad was same as mild mannered, and patient Moses.

best regards

piggy

Joined: 13 Feb 2004
Posts: 6372
Location: Godwana

Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 5:43 am Post subject:

I can see it now, 13 people go to Jerusalem in a bid to overthrow the Romans and seize power.

lilith

Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 821

Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 6:17 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Frederick is the subject of a sleeping hero legend. He is said not to be dead, but asleep with his knights in a cave in Kyffhäuser mountain in Thuringia, Germany, and that when ravens should cease to fly around the mountain he would awake and restore Germany to its ancient greatness. According to the story his red beard has grown through the table beside which he sits. His eyes are half closed in sleep, but now and then he raises his hand and sends a boy out to see if the ravens have stopped flying.

The German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 was codenamed Operation Barbarossa, remembering Frederick I.

Well piggy they can always keep the dream alive.
_________________
"You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean;
if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty.
Where there is love there is life."
Mahatma Gandhi

Bam

Joined: 28 Apr 2004
Posts: 137

Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2004 6:36 pm Post subject:

piggy wrote:

I can see it now, 13 people go to Jerusalem in a bid to overthrow the Romans and seize power

In spite of his violent proclivities as evident from his utterances (Mathew 10:34, Luke 19:27, Luke 22:36), your "messiah" being deluded by religious zeal, actually expected Yahweh/Elohim to do the work for him in fufillment of the prophecy which you quoted from Mathew 21:4-5:

piggy wrote:

'See, your king comes to you,
gentle and riding on a donkey,
on a colt, the foal of a donkey.'

Accordingly he commandeered (not borrowed) a donkey from th village - claiming to be the "Lord" - proceeded to Jerusalem.
Let me remind you of another quote you made from the bible:

piggy wrote:

he (Jesus) went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once (Luke 19:11).

Like I wrote before, after this parable the "Lord" ordered his disciple to commandeer a donkey in accordance with prophecy.
Jesus was actually proceeding to Jerusalem to acquire power.
But alas, the non-existent Yahweh failed to grant his prayers at Gethsmane and dissapointed him so he was arrested. Later he cried - My lord, my lord why has thou forsaken (dissapointed) me? (Mathew 27:46)

Quote:

it is clear he only borrowed the animals

Borrowing means asking and obtaining permission from the owner before taking someone else's property. That isn't want Jesus and his disciples did. They took the donkey and when queried, still did not ask for permission but simply stated that the Lord (King) needs it. This is commandeering - temporarily confiscating someone's property for use by an authority - the Lord. Lord of where? You said he wasn't interested in power, so why was he claiming to be the lord?

piggy wrote:

Jesus commanded Peter, "Put your sword away!"

Not because Jesus was a peaceful person, but because he realised the futility of just 13 people against the Romans - As the non-existent Yahweh/Elohim failed to help them.
At least Mohammed had the common sense to raise an army before confronting the Meccan pagans.

piggy wrote:

Remember the verse about Jesus stepping-in when some people were going to stone a woman to death?

This verse has been proven to be false. Read the annotations in your bible and you'll see that this particular verse (John 8:7), like numerous other bible alterations have been shown to be absent from the original bible manuscripts.

freeland

Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 179
Location: Italy

Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2004 9:04 pm Post subject:

You see what religion does to people? _________________ Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe... [Albert Einstein]

piggy

Joined: 13 Feb 2004
Posts: 6372
Location: Godwana

Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2004 6:35 am Post subject:

Bam wrote:

piggy wrote:

I can see it now, 13 people go to Jerusalem in a bid to overthrow the Romans and seize power

piggy wrote:

'See, your king comes to you,
gentle and riding on a donkey,
on a colt, the foal of a donkey.'

You have not proven a call for violence, and you persist in using this assertion as a basis of your argument.

He is not my "messiah".

The words from Matthew 21:4-5 are a comment by Matthew, after the event, and not reported as having been said by Jesus.

Bam wrote:

Accordingly he commandeered (not borrowed) a donkey from th village - claiming to be the "Lord" - proceeded to Jerusalem.
Let me remind you of another quote you made from the bible:

piggy wrote:

he (Jesus) went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once (Luke 19:11).

Like I wrote before, after this parable the "Lord" ordered his disciple to commandeer a donkey in accordance with prophecy.
Jesus was actually proceeding to Jerusalem to acquire power.

Jesus told his disciples to find the animal and tell the people that the " Lord needs it" - NOT to take it, like it or not.

The people allowed them to take the animal to satisfy the NEED...the people were NOT commanded.

There is no evidence that the people even owned the animal.

With regard to the parable of the master and his servants, it follows verses about a tax collector who can be likened to the master mentioned in the parable, who "reaped what he did not sow".

This parable is more likely to illustrate the similarities of the tax-collector and the greedy, money-hungry master in the parable.

Notice also that the master in the parable who went to be a king, "went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return".

Notice, "to have himself apponted" - NOT appoint himself.

No mention of over-throwing the authorities at the place he was appointed king, in fact no mention of over-throwing anyone.

You are desperately clutching at straws, Bam.

Bam wrote:

But alas, the non-existent Yahweh failed to grant his prayers at Gethsmane and dissapointed him so he was arrested. Later he cried - My lord, my lord why has thou forsaken (dissapointed) me? (Mathew 27:46)

How do you know what his prayers were at Gethsemane?

More inventions on your part.

"my Lord, my lord why hast thou forsaken me?"
[without your invented "disappointed"]

My comment:

A question, pure and simple.

Forsake = to leave, or stop doing or having something.

This question by Jesus could mean, "lord why have you stopped doing something" or "why have you left me".

Why would Jesus be disappointed in God, when he already had expressed his complete trust in God?......so it was a question.
Jesus could have meant, "why have you not allowed me to die sooner, rather than leave me suffering, nailed up here".

Bam, you have dishonestly tied this question from Jesus (re: forsaken) to a report about Jesus praying, the content of the prayer you inventingly claim to have had some promise from God, yet you don't know what the prayer was in the first instance let alone what reply that Jesus may or may not have received from God............more invention on your part, Bam.

Bam wrote:

Quote:

it is clear he only borrowed the animals

Already explained this above, Jesus commanded his disciples, not the people, the disciples proceeded to take an animal that no one had ridden and were instructed to tell the people if asked, that the "Lord" needed it, the people allowed them to take the horse and there also is mention that they returned the animal.

How do you know who was being referred to when Jesus told his disciples to say "the Lord needs it"?........Jesus might have been referring to God.

Furthermore, we don't know if these people who queried the disciples, even owned the the animal.

Bam, you are making things up and inventing things to suit your agenda.

bam wrote:

piggy wrote:

Jesus commanded Peter, "Put your sword away!"

More inventions on your part, Bam.

Jesus was already known as a non-violent person, to call for Peter to put away his sword was consistent with this.

IF Jesus asked Peter to put away his sword due to realizing "the futility of just 13 people against the Romans" - why would he suddenly realize this? - so he marches off to violently over-throw the Romans using weapons, and at the first encounter with a few people when he could have fulfilled his violent take-over, he suddenly changes his mind.

he would have gone down fighting, trusting God's promise (in the invented answer to his prayer at Gethsemane) in the full knowledge that to die by crucifixion would have been a more cruel and painful end as compared to fighting to the death there and then.

Bam wrote:

piggy wrote:

Remember the verse about Jesus stepping-in when some people were going to stone a woman to death?

What bible has these annotations?
I don't rely on this verse Bam, it's the first one I could think of, there are plenty of other reports of Jesus' kindness, mercy, compassion and humanitarian love for fellow man.

Got any more inventions and assumptions?

Last edited by piggy on Sun Oct 03, 2004 11:22 am; edited 1 time in total

piggy

Joined: 13 Feb 2004
Posts: 6372
Location: Godwana

Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2004 6:41 am Post subject:

freeland wrote:

You see what religion does to people?

Hi Freeland,

I don't know if you are referring to me, but to make it clear, I am not a christian, not in a religion, I don't believe; that Jesus was God or claimed to be God, or that Jesus is my saviour or messiah, or Mary was pregnant and virgin, or that Jesus walked on water, or rose from the dead.

I don't usually study bibles, except since I have been at this forum to answer people such as Bam here.

piggy

Joined: 13 Feb 2004
Posts: 6372
Location: Godwana

Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2004 8:50 am Post subject:

Bam wrote:

Historically crucifixtion was the punishment for those who rebelled against Roman rule. And as you rightly quoted Jesus aspired to be king:

Don't you think it is odd that Pilate "washed his hands" of the whole matter and left it to the people to decide?

It is obvious that the Romans did not consider that Jesus was attempting to over-throw them, (as you have invented) because according to "historical crucifixion" being the punishment for rebellion against Roman rule, Pilate would have had good reason to just nail him up on the spot, but he did not.........so much for the theory of violent over-throw or any over-throw.

It is clear that Jesus was deemed a threat only to the religious control-freaks of the day, who were the ones who dished-out the cruel punishments of "Mozaic law", to keep those laws in tact..the same laws that you assert Jesus "fully endorsed"............strange.

You have not proven your absurd, slanderous accusations Bam.

You have merely proven that you are a bigotted, slanderer who is prepared to stoop to invention, dishonesty and selective verse-quoting to further your agenda.

Display posts from previous:

	Faith Freedom International Forum Index -> [Archived] Comments on the Articles Posted in the Main Site	All times are GMT Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next
Page 4 of 8

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum